Bitcoin Forum
January 16, 2019, 07:34:41 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.1 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 ... 549 »
321  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: What is the difference between createmultisig and addmultisigaddress? on: April 26, 2018, 04:12:16 PM
Thank you for your answer.

When I create multisigaddress by using 'createmultisig' command in my full node coin server which I built, is it possible to remove private keys associated with this multisigaddress
from this server for the purpose of security ?

If possible,how should I do ?
No, you cannot delete private keys from a wallet. However, you can just run your coin server without a wallet which guarantees that there will not be private keys that are active on your server.
322  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: A critique on the Lightning Network from a regular poster. Long. on: April 26, 2018, 03:36:35 PM
Quote
Core is also the centralised regulator of the rules. they set the policy. change the rules and nodes(merchants) are suppose to follow cores set rules and reject(ban hammer) users(nodes) that send dodgy transactions/blocks
Except Core does not have any sort of centralized authority to force any rules to go through. Otherwise you would see all of the forks that the Core developers propose to activate within a few weeks of the software supporting the fork being available. Case in point, segwit. Segwit took several months to activate, way longer than any previous soft fork. It took people threatening to perform a user activated soft fork before miners finally activated it. The UASF was not something that was officially supported by Core (i.e. no Bitcoin Core release containing UASF logic). If the Core developers had centralized control over the consensus rules, then segwit would have activated quickly and without contention, which is clearly not what happenend.

Quote
It used to be the case that anyone can alter their node and then promote their own new feature. and if enough users liked it they would add it to thier node and then the network would evolve.
This is still the case. You can do that if you want. No one is preventing you from creating the next Bitcoin XT or Bitcoin Classic or Bitcoin Unlimited. No one can stop you from writing the software and running your own node. Just because the vast majority of users decided to stick with Core does not mean that Core can prevent you from doing this or that Core is forcing you do follow them.

Quote
LN is not a direct pay the recipiant(P2P).
It certainly is. You can open a payment channel directly with your recipient and avoid having to route your payment through anyone else.

Quote
its in laymans terms opening a channel(account) with a well routed(bank branch) hub. depositing funds into a channel(account) that requires co-signing(bank authorisation)
It can be used in that way, but that is not the only way to use LN.

Quote
all with the very same banking features of 3-5 business day settlemnt (CLTV
That is completely false. There is no 3-5 business day settlement. That is not what CLTV is used for. It is a timeout for if a transaction fails. Not a "transaction goes through after X time".

Quote
) and wire transfer chargebacks(CSV)
That is completely false. That is not what CSV is used for. It is used as a timeout during which time a punishment can occur which is not the same as a chargeback. Once an HTLC is resolved or once new commitment transactions are put in place, the payment is final. There is not charging back. Trying to perform a chargeback would mean that you are broadcasting an old commitment transaction which means that you LOSE ALL of your money, not you gaining back whatever money that you sent.

Quote
There are only ~1500 LN nodes.
It's still in beta, what do you expect?

Quote
but already there are hubs being the middlemen for ~10% of the network
You seem to be ignoring the criss-cross of gray lines for all of the other channels.

The "hubs" currently on mainnet are due to people opening direct channels with merchants (i.e. performing direct P2P payments).

Quote
Do you let there be 10 middle men having the authorisation power of the whole network. so that most people can make a payment only needing consent from maybe 2-10 middle men 'managers'(banks/hubs) to route
or break it down so that hubs can only have 1% of total channels. meaning more middle men are needed between you and the end destination where it would need the consent/authorisation of 2-100 middle men managers(banks/hubs)
None of the above, because nothing stops you from closing your own channel unilaterally and then opening a channel with someone else directly to avoid these middlemen.

You don't seem to understand how LN works. These hubs can't force you to do anything. You have full control over your money and you can close a channel any time you want. If you want to avoid hubs, then open a channel directly with the person you are paying. No one is forcing you to have channels with hubs nor is anyone forcing you to use LN anyways.
323  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: What is the difference between createmultisig and addmultisigaddress? on: April 26, 2018, 03:14:47 PM
If I create multisigaddress by using createmultisig command, is it true that nobodoy can get both privatekeys and redeemscript associated with this multisigaddress from this coins server ?
If the private keys are not stored on the server, then yes. However there is no such security guarantee. Createmultisig just prevents the generated redeemScript from being added to your wallet; the private keys for the public keys in that redeemScript could still be part of the wallet.
324  Other / Meta / Re: Banned for what? User: Sellingaccs on: April 26, 2018, 02:11:18 AM
The moderator achow101 is abusing his position here
I did not ban him nor did I request for him to be banned. Also, normal moderators cannot ban any users, they can only request bans.



The comment on your ban is "(Now edited out) Wirex phishing." I don't know what post this refers to, but presumably it's now gone.
325  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: airgapped wallets and private key theft on: April 26, 2018, 01:30:00 AM
Please do not post in a thread that is long dead. I have moved your post into it's own thread.

If you are not using a HD wallet, anytime you sign a transaction, your wallet.dat will be unencrypted in RAM, or more specifically, the decryption key to decrypt the wallet.dat file will be in RAM, along with the private key(s) of what you are using to sign.
The part I highlighted in red is where my questions focuses. I apologize if it sonds n00b I'm not very well versed with the core wallet and such.
That part you have highlighted is also partially incorrect. The HD-ness of a wallet does not matter, the decryption key is always held in RAM when your wallet is unlocked,

Suppose I have an airgap PC that I want to use to sign a transaction with but the wallet is passphrase protected. I assume that the wallet can't sign the transaction if it's kept locked correct? Therefore keeping it safe. The issue is once the wallet is opened the info is then sent to RAM and then it's game over.
Yes, your private keys are encrypted until you unlock your wallet. When your wallet is unlocked, the private keys are not actually held unenecrypted but rather the decryption key is.

However it is not necessarily game over even if you have malware. The decryption key is held in memory, but other software cannot typically access the memory of other programs unless it is executed with special permissions.

I'm also wondering what malware they created to be able to pull this off!? Super scary stuff!!
It's really not that special. In fact, the malware is probably something that is extremely simple because the wallet in the video is not even encrypted!. It just needs to read the wallet file in order to get the private key, and then encode that into an audio file and play that audio. It's not that scary and not very special. In fact, that paper itself is nothing new nor is it anything special. It is a well known fact that air gapped wallets are not foolproof and that there are non-networking methods of getting keys off of air gapped machines. Everything that they describe are methods long known before hand. The methods seems scary, but they really aren't as they all require a some fairly targeted attacks in order to pull off (i.e. they need to target you specifically and be somewhat physically close).
326  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Rewinding blocks every time I start bitcoin-qt on: April 25, 2018, 09:43:46 PM
Post your debug.log file.

Rewinding some blocks is always part of the startup sanity check, that is normal behavior. However it should not take very long.
327  Other / Meta / Re: Members in this forum are abusing the merit system on: April 25, 2018, 09:17:56 PM
OK number one from http://fonstavka.com/index.php?topic=3371680.new#new

Quote from: Bitcoin Forum
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted.

Quote
Are you talking about this "G"

Quote
public static readonly BigInteger P = "FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEFFFFFC2F".HexToBigInteger();
public static readonly ECPoint G = ECPoint.DecodePoint("0479BE667EF9DCBBAC5......FFB10D4B8".HexToBytes());
public static readonly BigInteger N = "FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEBAAEDCE6AF48A03BBFD25E8CD0364141".HexToBigInteger();

I don't get all the maths behind the curve and use some cheesy function to encrypt the keys during key exchange which is all but useless
since the project is open source (Will keep ISP's out) so maybe I should look more into what your saying here.

What i am desperate for is encryption that will work on 5k -2mb blocks that is fast and is not bloated to death or uses calls into windows
black box code like happens with DES/AES because it seems to be missing from the internet.

Byte shift is fast Date[f]=Crypto[Date[f]];
but using Maths.Mod is too slow for what i need.
Currently I have got something that looks like
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ABC>>>>>>>>>>>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<XYZ<<<<<<<<<<<
I could throw in some byte swap in the vertical axis but even then I don't think it
would be fantastic so it looks like I am stuck for now.

The post was off topic. In that thread, the OP is asking about secp256k1 and its security properties in regards to ECDH. Yet in your post, you do not talk about secp256k1 and its security properties. Instead you have decided to say that you don't understand the math (which is entirely unhelpful to the OP) and then go on to talk about things that you want and projects that you are doing. This is completely off topic for that thread, therefore it was deleted.
328  Other / Meta / Re: Members in this forum are abusing the merit system on: April 25, 2018, 08:37:57 PM
OK i will let you go first
Huh I thought the plan was for you to post the posts I deleted and have me explain them. Or did I get my threads mixed up?
329  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin Core 0.16.0 Released on: April 25, 2018, 08:22:46 PM
Hi all!

I am trying to rescue some BTCs from "wallet.dat corrupt, salvage failed"... I have tried many different things without success. Pywallet, for example, doesn't find anything at all in this wallet.dat. But it found some keys in another wallet.dat...
Please make a post in tech support, not here. Support requests are off topic for this thread.
330  Other / Off-topic / Re: File storage options and technology selection for accounting software on: April 25, 2018, 08:13:04 PM
Don't use a blockchain. It's not just a magic thing that magically makes all of your problems go away. A blockchain may be secure (it also could not, depending on how it is implemented), but it certainly is not fast.
331  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Why Transaction Fees in the First Place? on: April 25, 2018, 05:04:46 AM
Anyone cares to explain why and when transaction fees become mandatory. (Or are they mandatory? As far as I can tell, there is no way I could set 0 tnx fee in electrum.)
Transaction fees are not mandatory, you can create a 0 fee transaction that is consensus valid. However such low fee transactions are considered non standard and thus will not be relayed by most nodes. Because of this standardness rule, most wallets make it impossible to set 0 fee.

Was there a need to introduce a criterion by which miners could sort transactions in some meaningful way (that is, from highest fees to lowest)? Because miners seem to have total freedom when it comes to including transactions in the blocks they mine.

Was this really necessary, perhaps to prevent congestion?
AFAICT, the idea to migrate to fee based selection came up very early on in order to prepare for post-block subsidy world. Since the block subsidy halves every 4 years on average, it will reach negligible amounts fairly soon as it is an exponential decay. In order to make up for the decreased block subsidy, we need transaction fees. The transition from primarily priority to primarily transaction fees needs to happen at some point, and probably sooner is better than later.

Other than that I see no reason to increase the mining reward, after all 12.5BTC seems to be high enough a reward.
It seems how now, but in the fast when all of this happened, 12.5 BTC was in fact a fairly small amount. First of all, the block reward was previously 25 BTC, and before that, 50 BTC. At those times, the block reward was worth a lot less in USD than the block reward is now in USD. It's USD value is so low that it was actually not profitable to be a miner for quite some time or you need to have special conditions (special electric prices, etc.) in order to be profitable.
332  Other / Meta / Re: Members in this forum are abusing the merit system on: April 25, 2018, 12:52:05 AM
You deleting my post without warrant matters to me so you decide which way you want it and I will run with it.
Then let's do this publicly here or in the other thread.
333  Other / Meta / Re: Members in this forum are abusing the merit system on: April 25, 2018, 12:31:50 AM
Wise man, I keep clear too most the time so do you want to have this out in private using PM's tomorrow or shall we
keep going here in public ?
I don't care. Whatever you want. This really doesn't matter to me.
334  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Hard Drive Speed running a Core Node on: April 25, 2018, 12:15:42 AM
Syncing Bitcoin Core for you is going to take a long time with slow write speeds. Also, because it is an external drive, the blockchain will have a higher chance of becoming corrupted. So you could store the blockchain on your external drive, but I would not recommend it.
335  Other / Meta / Re: Members in this forum are abusing the merit system on: April 25, 2018, 12:14:39 AM
Was i breaking another term and condition of the site by offering you a bet
Not at all, I just don't gamble.
336  Other / Meta / Re: Members in this forum are abusing the merit system on: April 24, 2018, 11:46:36 PM
oh so was someone here who could be trusted given my login password then they would not see lots of posts warning in my message inbox that full thanks to you
and if they looked at the date/time of the warning message and the time my comment was posted and then looked at how long it took to get deleted then they would agree with you that you are not following me around.

Tell me are you a betting man because if you are then agree to give in your position as moderator here and I will agree to keep away if they agree with your version of the story or have you been caught in a lie this time ?

Hang around, I will look to see if the time stamps are available
I am not a betting man so I will not take you up on that offer. However, I would be interesting to see what someone thinks about that.
337  Other / Meta / Re: Nazi moderator has deleted 4 of my posts here today. on: April 24, 2018, 11:44:19 PM
The majority of the posts of yours I removed were reported by other users for being off topic or spam. It's not like I'm actively following every single post you make and deleting each one. You may notice that many of your posts which do not take threads in completely different directions have not been removed even though they certainly could have been as they are within my jurisdiction. Furthermore, you are not the only person whose posts have been removed by me. I remove many posts from many different users each day. This is called moderation, not censorship.

Pack of lies and you know it or would you like to say why this was removed from here http://fonstavka.com/index.php?topic=3371680.msg35378165#msg35378165

Quote
This is a good point and I am developing an open source 515 byte Cyphertext (Switches left to right)
using byte shift instead of BigINT and MOD's mainly because it needs to be very fast with 1-5mb blocks but clearly
just doubling up to avoid noun detection does not make it bullet proof so I threw in a little byte swapping too.

Sure it can still be cracked but for movie file shares and HTML + Image encryption I think it offers enough
encryption plus the key exchange is done using secp256k so being practical I think I have the right mix.

One size fits all for encryption does not work in my book
What does this post have to do with the topic of "Key agreement protocol Diffie-Hellman using Bitcoin's secp256k1" and whether secp256k1 is safe for ECDH? The discussion in that thread is about secp256k1 and its properties, yet your post talks about something that you are developing and how that works. What you are developing has nothing to do with secp256k1 and is irrelevant to that topic. The only mention of secp256k1 is that you are going to use it for key exchange, but that is not helpful to the topic at all. The focus of this post is not about the properties of secp256k1 and its security but rather about your thing which just happens to use secp256k1. It is a tangent to the topic and it thus off topic, so I removed it.

Furthermore, that post was reported to me by another user, see the below screenshot:



One rule for some and another rule for everyone else with you in charge mate like MooDog being abusive and you don't do naff all about it
but when someone hits back, well your like mother hen protecting your chicks.
In what way is DooMad being abusive? If you use the report to moderator link, I'll see the report and do something about it. As I said earlier, I am not following you around, I am primarily responding to reports.

But that's just what you are doing, bias deleting of posts and pro-bitcoin posters here who get blown away by the facts I present
don't get this treatment so clearly you have a vested interest and you should step down if you cannot control yourself.
In what way have any pro-bitcoin posters been "blown away by the facts" that you present? I have left up a lot of your posts, especially the stuff about lightning network. Tell me, where do you see these people being "blown away"? AFAICT, they are more blown away by your stupidity than any "facts" that you present.

Censorship mate, book burning, cap fits so wear it and me and you should have had this out a long time ago so maybe you thought
I would roll over, your wrong.
And clearly you think that I would roll over. You're wrong.

I call him a nazi for his censorship but if you want I will trust with my login so then you can see all my messages
in the inbox that he keeps deleting and yes some were fair play, others for pointing him out but in lots of case
he is out of order and I will not stand for it.
If you want, post every single message that I have deleted that you have a problem with me deleting and I will give you an explanation for why that was deleted or an apology if something was deleted without cause. If you're going to do that, please also provide a link to the thread that the post was deleted from.
338  Other / Meta / Re: Members in this forum are abusing the merit system on: April 24, 2018, 11:33:10 PM
This is bullshit he is talking and he has been following me around all day and one post that i was watching was deleted in second so lets try looking at this post the dick deleted as an example.
I have not been following you around. I have my watchlist (which contains threads that you post in) open on another monitor with it set to autorefresh every minute, so I will see if anyone (including you) posts in one of those threads. So of course I saw your post soon after you posted it, I was online at the time looking at my watchlist.
339  Other / Meta / Re: Ministry of Bitcoin Propaganda (MBTCP) on: April 24, 2018, 07:09:31 PM
so I would like to know if I have the world record yet.

Nah, there's people who have had more posts deleted than you.

Code:
('member #2025424', 10)
('member #1011631', 10)
('member #2025451', 10)
('member #1999068', 10)
('member #676128', 10)
('member #712379', 10)
('member #1328547', 10)
('member #16673', 10)
('member #1941384', 10)
('member #1839198', 10)
('member #2040638', 11)
('member #1321028', 11)
('member #2009863', 11)
('member #1964752', 11)
('member #1351060', 11)
('member #1410946', 11)
('member #2008655', 12)
('member #106010', 12)
('member #400366', 12)
('member #720294', 12)
('member #1868482', 12)
('member #112590', 12)
('member #1457466', 12)
('member #1360245', 12)
('member #1862740', 12)
('member #1116936', 13)
('member #1731117', 13)
('member #1989970', 13)
('member #1790929', 13)
('member #1836361', 14)
('member #2022359', 14)
('member #1424569', 14)
('member #252173', 15)
('member #914134', 15)
('member #1972978', 15)
('member #1357663', 17)
('member #1001233', 17)
('member #1989981', 17)
('member #1423316', 18) <---This is you
('member #1106068', 18)
('member #970182', 18)
('member #1804855', 19)
('member #1554619', 20)
('member #1728726', 21)
('member #18201', 21)
('member #1707870', 22)
('member #1344614', 22)
('member #1593008', 23)
('member #1989640', 23)
('member #1670837', 26)
('member #1444132', 27)
('member #1232636', 27)
('member #1832429', 28)
('member #1639334', 32)
('member #1791752', 32)
('member #1140197', 32)
('member #1702038', 33)
('member #1848619', 37)
('member #1738568', 39)
('member #2010332', 43)
('member #1873035', 44)
('member #845046', 44)
('member #1059454', 57)
('member #1153166', 66)
('member #1923831', 68)
('member #1707247', 98)
('member #1905021', 184)

That list is just a list of those people who are listed in the modlog more than 10 times. IIRC the modlog retains 30 days of actions. Scraped using a script I just wrote.
340  Other / Meta / Re: Nazi moderator has deleted 4 of my posts here today. on: April 24, 2018, 04:43:53 PM
The majority of the posts of yours I removed were reported by other users for being off topic or spam. It's not like I'm actively following every single post you make and deleting each one. You may notice that many of your posts which do not take threads in completely different directions have not been removed even though they certainly could have been as they are within my jurisdiction. Furthermore, you are not the only person whose posts have been removed by me. I remove many posts from many different users each day. This is called moderation, not censorship.

My job is not to censor you nor is it to "maintain some narrative" (if it were, then a lot of posts from users like franky1 would have been removed). My job is to keep threads on topic and to remove useless posts that add nothing to the discussion.

Also moderators cannot ban anyone. Only admins and global mods can do that, and they only ban if they agree with a moderators suggestion that someone should be banned.



What makes you think I'm a fascist or a nazi? Do you realize that there are more to those terms than just censorship?



Side note: complaining about my moderation in every post you make is off topic for all of the places you are posting and thus your posts will likely be removed if you do that.



Regarding your newest spam about needing to index the site to see what posts are deleted, there's a public modlog although it does not contains the contents of the posts that were removed, just what action was taken.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 ... 549 »
Bitcointalk.org is not available or authorized for sale. Do not believe any fake listings.
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!